Time for MVL or not and IR35

[mogga71]

But we've never been in a situation where the LTD was shut down BECAUSE of an inside determination. Completely different world now. If you could guess the real number of IR35 investigations and you were completely wrong would you stop taking you never hearing it happen as a yard stick. Many cases don't get to the public eye. You could be right but because you haven't heard of isn't much of guide.

Also remember shutting down isn't an option for many as they may have to MVL which means the can't contract under a LTD for two years etc. Not everyone that has gone inside can or should shut their LTD.


Maybe but that's a poor example. With outside to inside HMRC has a letter from the client saying sorry my contractor has been inside all along. It's a slam dunk (nearly). Throwing in fraudulent tax practices isn't that helpful. If people are gonna do that then bring it on HMRC.

I think you are being far too flippant and are missing details. Bank weren't told to consider themselves inside they've banned the use of PSC's which is wholly different. No determination is made. There is a lot to consider. Ban of PSCs, blanket inside and role based determinations all have different problems and risks. There are plenty of gigs out there that have had a proper determination made and I don't see how you can argue a contractor in that situation has any defence. To lump all these in to one comment you don't think any are worthy of investigation is very misguided.



Same as before. Not every company is doing this so why do you think they are safe? And that's only one situation out of many

Common sense dictates it's free money for HMRC and now here is a massive black hole in the budget. You know, you actually might be right about them being safe in the long run but to be so flippant about the level of risk with a mountain of evidence against it I think is not a safe position. It's as head in the sand approach like many people have had about IR35 all along.

Nothing might happen and you can come back in a few years and say I told you so but to be so flippant about it is wrong.

Sorry, I may well have come across as being a bit flippant as you say.

End of the day it's all about our opinions. I am probably too optimistic.

One thing though ... what do you mean by this :

'With outside to inside HMRC has a letter from the client saying sorry my contractor has been inside all along.'?

[Lance]

This is incorrect. You can start up as many Limited Companies as you want but they cannot be in an identical or very similar business area. The interpretation of that is open. With due diligence it's fine, as long as you aren't contracting in IT within Project Management and then MVL, to then open another company with the intent and act of Project Management or acting as such, whether the job title matches or not, within 2 years.

so are you saying that of the two options....

- MVL then startup a new LTD with a slightly different business area
- startup a new LTD with a slightly different business area then MVL the older company

the second reduces the risk of being caught by TAAR?
That's what is sounds like you're saying.

[northernladuk]

Sorry, I may well have come across as being a bit flippant as you say.

End of the day it's all about our opinions. I am probably too optimistic.

One thing though ... what do you mean by this :

'With outside to inside HMRC has a letter from the client saying sorry my contractor has been inside all along.'?

HMRC will have a list of all contractors outside. They ask the client for a list of all contractors with inside determinations (i.e. the letter, bad wording sorry). HMRC compares them and ends up with a list of all contractors that have been incorrectly paying tax.

[northernladuk]

This is incorrect. You can start up as many Limited Companies as you want but they cannot be in an identical or very similar business area. The interpretation of that is open. With due diligence it's fine, as long as you aren't contracting in IT within Project Management and then MVL, to then open another company with the intent and act of Project Management or acting as such, whether the job title matches or not, within 2 years.

I don't think it is as open as you think. I'd imagine the SIC code is a starter for 10 and nearly all of us fall under the same one. Our skill base is pretty static as well. A wording change in a title isn't going to cut it. Infrastructure Project Manager or IT Constultant on an Infrastructure sound different but isn't going to fool anyone. We have a very specific skill base so trying to prove you are working in a different area is going to be difficult.

Your last statement also clarifies his so agree but I don't agree the interpretation is open.

[mogga71]

HMRC will have a list of all contractors outside. They ask the client for a list of all contractors with inside determinations (i.e. the letter, bad wording sorry). HMRC compares them and ends up with a list of all contractors that have been incorrectly paying tax.

But that is obviously ignoring the fact that the Banks made blanket assessments that from April 5 2020 all contractors were now inside ir35 ... regardless of whether they were actually really inside or not. That surely has no bearing on what the circumstances were before that? It's not as if the Banks reviewed each contract.

[dsc]

But that is obviously ignoring the fact that the Banks made blanket assessments that from April 5 2020 all contractors were now inside ir35 ... regardless of whether they were actually really inside or not. That surely has no bearing on what the circumstances were before that? It's not as if the Banks reviewed each contract.

So what? You are then still on HMRC's radar and they don't care if you were truly outside, they will assume inside all along and open up a case. I think you have them confused with a body that gives a toss, they want money from taxes and they will bully you into paying unless you defend yourself or have insurance / representation that will step in to do so, at that point they normally give up and move on to someone who's an easier target.

The whole idea is to avoid being on HMRC's radar altogether and to not have to go through the hassle of defending yourself / having to prove innocence.

[Paralytic]

But that is obviously ignoring the fact that the Banks made blanket assessments that from April 5 2020 all contractors were now inside ir35 ... regardless of whether they were actually really inside or not. That surely has no bearing on what the circumstances were before that? It's not as if the Banks reviewed each contract.

That is NOT a fact. Many banks simply stopped engaging Ltd company contractors.

Which ones "made blanket assessments that from April 5 2020 all contractors were now inside ir35"?

[quantum77]

Given that I'm paying around £200/yr for IR35 insurance

Out of interest, which company is the insurance with? PCG/IPSE?

[Peejay]

Out of interest, which company is the insurance with? PCG/IPSE?

It's QDOS